Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les compositeurs et leurs interprètes collaborent à la création des oeuvres. La nature et le degré de cette collaboration sont variables. Cet article s’intéresse à la marque laissée sur la musique vocale de Pascal Dusapin par le contact des chanteurs Françoise Kubler et Georg Nigl. L’analyse se colore de l’expérience de l’auteur, lui-même praticien de la musique de ce compositeur. Le parcours du compositeur prend son essor dans une approche expérimentale, mise de l’avant dans la musique de chambre, et s’ouvre graduellement à l’opéra, oeuvre d’art total. Ce cheminement se cristallise dans les rapports de Dusapin avec Kubler et Nigl. À la question de l’expressivité de la diction, ou de sa neutralisation et de son abstraction, Dusapin répond par l’immédiateté de la dimension théâtrale, à travers les timbres de la voix et les mimiques corporelles. Le geste imaginé par le compositeur communique un affect. Il est non seulement vocal, mais il englobe le déploiement du corps chantant dans l’espace.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".